But wouldn't it be better to simply modify the container to
appropriately scope the attributes? For intance, could there be a stack
that we pop off when the attributes get out of scope? I guess I don't
see what this problem requires additional container methods. It should
be handled internally, not by requiring every client to use it.
David
Antonio Petrelli wrote:
2007/2/5, David H. DeWolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Antonio,
I'm starting to get a *little* concerned that our container interface is
becoming more verbose than it needs to be. Can you explain the use case
for the additions below and why we can't just add attributes to the
existing context?
The answer is almost completely here:
http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/TILES-96
If you put an attribute using <tiles:putAttribute> every attribute
with the same name will be overridden, instead of working only inside
their parent tag.
I think that the methods without the ComponentContext parameters are
of no use (at least they are not used inside JSP tags).
I added a new test link in the test webapp ("Test Insert Configured
Definition with an overridden content and one with original content").
Antonio
